We have an adversarial legal system. We have had for centuries. To make it work both the accused and the accuser/s are entitled to legal representation. The legal representatives are entitled to be paid. I don't see that there is anything here worth questioning. If people don't like it, what would they like instead? That the guilt or innocence of the accused is decided in advance and then only the innocent get representation? I don't see why we would need a court system at all under those circumstances since the "authorities" would already have decided things. Which, of course, is it the way things used to be in this country several centuries ago before habeas corpus and other civil rights were established through struggles to establish a system of law that bound first kings and then parliaments.
The alternative is Guantanamo Bay. I'll join with others in a fight against attempts to establish any such thing in the UK.